The film uncovers the secret history of how the Soviet Union used Islamists and dictators in the Middle East to further its objectives and how Vladimir Putin’s Russia continues this strategy today, endangering Americans and all freedom-loving peoples.

After World War II, the Soviet Union used Muslim intelligence assets to subvert neighboring Muslim-majority nations. Putin’s Russia continues to infiltrate Islamic communities around the world, including Chechnya, Iran, Syria and Palestine, and also at home in the United States, where Islamists and communists have joined in an unlikely alliance.

The film is narrated and written by conservative author Trevor Loudon, directed by Judd Saul and produced by Cohesion Films in partnership with Dangerous Documentaries (a project of the Capital Research Center). (Bombthrowers, too, is a project of Capital Research Center.)

The first film in our “America Under Siege” webseries, “Civil War 2017,” is available to view here.

Egypt’s Coptic Christians suffered another fatal attack on its churches during this morning’s (April 9) Palm Sunday celebrations. Many parishioners were killed and maimed in a dual-church attack during the Palm Sunday services.

North of Cairo, a terrorist bomb struck the Church of Saint George in Tanta claiming the lives of more than 40 worshippers and injuring at least 65 attendees.

Simultaneously, the Morkussia Church of Alexandria was bombed leaving at least 15 persons dead and many more injured. After leading the celebration mass, Coptic Pope Tawadros II left the Morkussia Church minutes before the planted bomb exploded. Aside from the casualties from the Coptic population, four police officers were killed.

Immediately upon the tragic moments of this dual attack, Al Azhar Institute — the center for Sunni Muslim scholarship and the core of Egypt’s deep state — announced that such actions represented strange, abnormal behavior from Islam given its peaceful doctrine. President Al-Sisi followed with his routine phone call to the Coptic Pope to offer solidarity and an investigation.

The Egyptian news reported that during this event the government dismissed the Western Province police director from his duties. It is speculated that the director was known as a terror sympathizer or even complicit in this occurrence. However, no one knows for certain the motivation behind his firing, which followed on the heels of a brutal beating by Coptic youths outside the church when the director appeared after the bombing to investigate.

The Coptic Orthodox Church seems to have joined the rhetoric of the deep state and the Al-Sisi administration using a deception that has facilitated and sustained a long string of terrorist attacks targeting Coptic Christians in recent months and years since A-Sisi came to office.

Reflecting this is a recent statement made by Coptic Bishop Emanuel a few days ago saying, “The Coptic situation improved after the June 30 uprising,” (referring to Morsi’s removal from leadership in 2013). He added, “Copts are getting their full rights and now everyone lives in peace, and such improvement is due to a government and president who care for everyone without distinction.” Even a cursory understanding of Egyptian events reveals the delusional nature of his statements or even worse, his intent to deceive.

Voice of the Copts offers its deepest condolences to the families and sincere hope and prayers for the full and speedy recovery of all injured parties.

I simply adore Ted Cruz. He’s absolutely right here. If an American citizen tries to join ISIS or any other terrorist group, they should have their citizenship stripped. That means for those who go overseas to wage Jihad, the door will no longer be open to them to return here. And before the left starts screeching over this, Hillary Clinton supported very similar legislation. Cruz supports President Trump’s embattled plan to temporarily ban refugees from seven Middle Eastern countries. So do I. He just thinks it only addresses half the problem and he has a point. We don’t want trained, battle hardened Jihadists returning to the US after going on a killing spree.

When previous versions of this bill were submitted, some civil libertarians threw a fit. They claim it would give the federal government expanded powers to revoke citizenship without due process. That’s rich considering they never decried Obama’s extension of federal powers. Under Cruz’s bill, anyone who lost their citizenship over alleged terrorist ties would have 60 days to request a due process hearing to challenge the decision. “The awesome and horrible power of being able to take away the citizenship of an American citizen would be turned over to an unnamed bureaucrat,” claimed Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington legislative office. It is not unconstitutional and I contend it would indeed stand if it went to the Supreme Court.

From the Washington Examiner:

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is renewing a push for Congress to pass legislation that would revoke the citizenship of any American who tries to join the Islamic State or other terrorist groups.

Cruz thinks that banning people from terrorist-stricken countries from entering the U.S. only deals with half of the problem, and that the federal government also needs to worry about U.S. citizens who may try the same thing.

“If an American citizen travels abroad and joins a terrorist group waging jihad on America, attempting to murder innocent Americans, this legislation would strip that individual of their U.S. citizenship, so that we would not have terrorists returning to America using U.S. passports,” Cruz told the Washington Examiner.

Hundreds of Americans have tried to join the Islamic State in recent years, according to Cruz. He said another 124 U.S. citizens or green card holders have traveled overseas to join other jihadist groups in the years since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. “This should be an idea that even Senate Democrats can support given that Hillary Clinton, when she was in the Senate, supported very similar legislation,” he said.

Ted Cruz steadfastly stands by his bill. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa has introduced it for consideration. Cruz says it uses the same process to revoke citizenship from terrorists that the government has used since 1926 to revoke citizenship from Americans who join foreign armies at war with the United States. That’s exactly right. “This legislation is a common sense step to recognize that people can [wage] war against America in more ways than one,” he said. “You don’t need to be a member of a nation-state military to be a terrorist at war with America.”

There is a good chance that the bill will pass in Congress considering the Trump administration’s agreement with its pretext. Additionally, a former Cruz staffer, Victoria Coates, now works for the White House National Security Council. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota in the House joins Senator Cruz in support for the bill. It is entitled the Expatriate Terrorists Act. Meanwhile, in the House of Representatives, Republicans Bachmann and Ted Poe of Texas also introduced bills that call for the United States to revoke the passports of Americans involved with groups like ISIS.

Bachmann puts it perfectly: “Those who have joined a foreign terrorist organization have taken up arms against the United States and our very way of life. By turning against their country, their passports should be revoked and if they’re naturalized citizens, they should lose their citizenship.”

Finally! President Trump did it… he froze refugees from coming into the US for four months. I would have preferred two years for all immigrants, but I’ll take it. He also permanently banned all Syrian refugees until further notice. Extreme vetting will now begin to be implemented through the Department of Homeland Security and the Secretaries of State. Trump also lowered the number of refugees that can come into the US in a given year to 50,000. Obama has already had 32,125 come in, so there will be very few coming in the rest of the year.

Now… if we can now emulate Switzerland on reviewing refugees as well, that will be a good start. They require that immigrants and refugees assimilate into their culture or they are deported. They are watched for years and their neighbors are interviewed. For instance, school girls who refuse to swim in a pool with boys violate their rules and their whole family is deported over it. We need similar reviews of those already here.

From Breitbart:

President Trump signed an executive order late Friday which temporarily bars refugees from entering the United States.

Trump signed the order on refugees while at the Pentagon, minutes after General James Mattis was sworn in as Secretary of Defense by Vice President Mike Pence at a brief ceremony which the president attended.

Suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days, prohibiting the arrival of refugees into the United States from any country during that period

Ordered the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to undertake a complete review of the refugee vetting process

Permanently banned Syrian refugees until President Trump determined otherwise, and

Lowered the ceiling of refugees allowed to enter the United States during FY 2017 to 50,000.

Opponents of the federal refugee resettlement program praised Trump’s actions. “This is a great beginning, and much needed,” Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch told Breitbart News.

During the 12 months up to September 30, 2016, the federal government accepted 84,995 refugees in the United States.

In the three months and twenty-seven days since Fiscal Year 2017 began on October 1, 2016, 32,125 refugees have entered the United States.

In an exclusive one-on-one interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), President Trump told CBN’s David Brody of The Brody File that he will be reversing the Obama regime’s preference of Muslims over Christians when it comes to allowing refugees to enter the United States from foreign countries. Glory freaking hallelujah! That’s simply awesomesauce.

DAVID BRODY: “When it comes to persecuted Christians — we’ve talked about this. Overseas, the refugee program that — or the changes you’re looking to make — as it related to persecuted Christians, do you see them as kind of a priority here?”

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: “Yes. They’ve been horribly treated. You know, if you were a Christian in Syria, it was impossible, at least very, very tough to get into the United States.

If you were a Muslim, you could come in. But if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible. And the reason that was so unfair is that — everybody was persecuted in all fairness; they were chopping off the heads of everybody — but more so the Christians.

And I thought it was very very unfair, so we are going to help them.”

I assume this means there will be exceptions made for Christians fleeing Syria. I’m ecstatic over that. The executive order does allow the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security the discretion, on a case by case basis, “to process… those refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” I could kiss the lawyer that wrote that… that refers directly to Christians.

The Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday announced the suspension of the processing of any refugees overseas currently under consideration for acceptance to the program. The executive order also included a temporary block on visas for 90 days for “immigrants and non-immigrants” from Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iran and Iraq, and specifically directed the Secretary of State to “request all foreign governments that do not supply such information [regarding refugee vetting] to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.”

Signing the “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals” executive order was one of two executive actions taken by President Trump immediately after he congratulated General Mattis. The other action was the signing of a presidential memorandum, whose purpose, the president said, is “to begin a great rebuilding of the armed services of the United States, developing a plan for new planes, new ships, new resources and new tools for our men and women in uniform.” All of this makes me warm and fuzzy inside. What a great first week.

President Trump referred to ISIS as ‘sneaky, dirty rats’ in his interview with Sean Hannity this week. I have much more descriptive terms for them, but I understand the use of sanitized descriptors for these monsters. Trump is correct that when we fought Germany and Japan, they wore uniforms and were easy to identify. With ISIS, you can only go by their religious beliefs and their military moves. This is where extreme vetting comes into play. And perhaps the cunning use of flags (see Eddie Izzard):

In all seriousness, President Trump is right… these are evil bastards. And evil always loses in the end… see General ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis. Trump also discussed enhanced interrogation techniques and torture. Personally, I’m all for them. I truly believe that there are times when it is the only thing that produces results, if you are going to get anything at all out of the enemy. The enemy has no moral dilemma about torturing us. War is hell and sometimes violence is required. I know that is shocking… the left can just deal with it.

From Breitbart:

Appearing on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program Thursday evening, President Donald Trump had some choice words for the Islamic State.

We have evil that lurks around the corner without the uniforms. Ours is harder because the people that we’re going against, they don’t wear uniforms. They’re sneaky, dirty rats. And they blow people up in a shopping center. And they blow people up in a church. These are bad people.

When you’re fighting Germany, they had their uniforms, and Japan, and they had their uniforms and they had their flags on the plane and the whole thing. We are fighting sneaky rats right now that are sick and demented. And we’re going to win.

Trump also discussed the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, after Hannity argued opponents of waterboarding would endorse the technique if their own loved ones had been kidnapped by terrorists.

Trump said yesterday that despite his feeling that torture works, he’s going to defer judgement on that to his Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, who openly disagrees with him. I find that surprising from Mattis, but we will see. I think Mattis is more of a ‘shoot first and screw the intel’ kind of guy. Trump is deferring to Mattis as he should here. He said Defense Secretary James Mattis “doesn’t intend to use it” and “I’m with him all the way.”

President Trump is also cultivating a close relationship with Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has been extremely critical of radical Islam. “He went into a tough situation, and all I can say is, I like him,” Trump declared. As for Saudi Arabia, Trump suggested he was biting his tongue in the interests of maintaining a good relationship with the Kingdom, but he is not pleased with their past activities: “A lot of money is being spent from certain countries on radicalizing people. I don’t like that. I don’t like that.” Saudi Arabia is not our friend and they should be treated as an enemy as far as I’m concerned. Along with Iran, I blame them for 9/11. Trump will have to tread lightly there, but in the end he may find that you can’t really befriend Islamists. It always ends badly.

There is some additional help coming from the Trump administration as President Trump is likely to issue and sign executive order on immigration that will impact visa holders from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. These are worn torn countries where hostilities continue with terror organizations. An issue that still remains however that Trump has not addressed is the asylum seekers.

A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit the Governor of a State to reject the resettlement of a refugee in that State unless there is adequate assurance that the alien does not present a security risk and for other purposes. The 2 page text is here.

New bill from Cruz, Poe would let states reject refugees

WT: Republicans in the House and Senate have introduced legislation that would give governors the power to reject federal efforts to resettle refugees in their states.

The bill from Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Ted Poe, both of Texas, is a reaction to years of growing GOP frustration with the Obama administration’s aggressive effort to take in refugees and resettle them across the country. Republicans continue to have doubts that refugees can be vetted to ensure they aren’t Islamic State terrorists.

The State Refugee Security Act would require the federal government to notify states at least 21 days before they seek to settle a refugee. Under the bill, if a state governor certifies that the federal government hasn’t offered enough assurances that the refugee does not pose a security risk, the state can block the resettlement effort.

Poe said the Obama administration’s “open door policy” has forced states to take on refugees without these guarantees, and said states need a way to opt out.

“Until the federal government can conduct thorough security screenings and confirm that there are no security risks, Congress should empower states to be able to protect their citizens by refusing to participate in this program,” he said.

Cruz said the first obligation of the president is to keep Americans safe, and said the bill would be a step in that direction.

“I am encouraged that, unlike the previous administration, one of President Trump‘s top priorities is to defeat radical Islamic terrorism,” he said. “To augment the efforts of the new administration, this legislation I have introduced will reinforce the authority of the states and governors to keep their citizens safe.”

****

The Trump White House also has not addressed the issue of criminal deportation of foreign nationals. Each foreign inmate is known to cost the taxpayer an estimated $21,000 per year. Enforcement and removal operations of those illegal foreign nationals now falls to the newly confirmed DHS Secretary Kelly.

FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals

In addition to its criminal investigative responsibilities, ICE shares responsibility for enforcing the nation’s civil immigration laws with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). ICE’s role in the immigration enforcement system is focused on two primary missions: (1) the identification and apprehension of criminal aliens and other removable individuals located in the United States; and (2) the detention and removal of those individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S., as well as those apprehended by CBP officers and agents patrolling our nation’s borders.

In executing these responsibilities, ICE has prioritized its limited resources on the identification and removal of criminal aliens and those apprehended at the border while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. This report provides an overview of ICE Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 civil immigration enforcement and removal operations. See FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals Statistics

Expectations of a quick solution and immediate movement to address the immigration matter are misplaced as this will be a long slog of an operation and will take the coordination of several agencies including the U.S. State Department which is presently operating without a Secretary until Rex Tillerson is confirmed and sworn in. The fallout will include a diplomatic challenge which is many cases does need to occur, however other nations such as China and Russia will step in to intrude on the process including those at the United Nations level, falling into the lap of the newly confirmed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

Hosted by DENISE SIMON, the Senior Research / Intelligence Analyst for Foreign and Domestic Policy for numerous flag officers and intelligence organizations.

SEGMENT 1: Eric Tallant, presently assigned to Kabul, Afghanistan explains in more detail Soviet Union ‘Active Measures’ a formal operation of disinformation and propaganda created by the KGB that continues to be applied today.

SEGMENT 2: Patrick Dunlevy, author or The Fertile Soil of Jihad, a contributor to the Investigative Project and former Deputy Inspector General for the New York prison system explained domestic financing of terrorists in the United States and the classifications of Jihadis being either enemy combatants or just law enforcement cases.

SEGMENTS 3 & 4: Tom Del Baccaro, former GOP chief for California, contributor to Forbes, lawyer and author of The Divided Era, explained in comprehensive detail what the progressives, Democrats and the Left have planned to cause chaos and destruction in the incoming Trump administration as well as the Republican controlled Congress.

BROADCAST WORLDWIDE:THURSDAYS: 9:00 PM (eastern) on:

WJHC – Talk 107.5 FM
WDDQ – Talk 92.1 FM
WLBB – News Talk 1330 AM

And on her Digital Flagship Station: RED NATION RISING RADIO – The NEW Dominant Force in Conservative Talk Radio

Amri had been denied asylum in Germany due to his terror risk, but was not deported because Tunisia would not accept him since he lacked a passport. Amri carried six different aliases from three nations and had been monitored by German authorities. He was not a “lone jihadist” but part of an ISIS cell, and traveled covertly, like some of the Paris killers, with the refugee flow from the Mediterranean.

All this followed on the heels of November’s Ohio State knife attack by Somali Muslim refugee Abdul Artan. These attacks typify the kinds recommended in ISIS literature, and ISIS claims credit for most of them. With Berlin, Brussels, Orlando, and so many other horrific attacks this year, San Bernardino and Paris almost seem like old news.

Although we view these events with horror and growing alarm, the outgoing Obama administration is literally importing terrorists through our nation’s refugee programs. Because private contractors are paid by the head to resettle refugees and other needy populations, the resettlement program has built-in incentives for uncontrolled growth. This harmonizes with the Left’s open borders agenda, which seeks to swell the rolls of new Democrat voters while weakening the influence of traditional (read conservative) America.

Big business shares this agenda in seeking cheap, subsidized labor. The resulting bipartisan alliance has long subsidized a resettlement industry that is expensive, secretive, duplicitous, and unconcerned about the Americans who pay for it with hard-earned tax dollars. The refugee resettlement program must be abolished in its current form before it puts us on the path toward today’s turbulent France and Germany.

The Real Risk of Increasing Terrorism

The most important risk the current refugee program creates is terrorism. Since 9/11 there have been 580 convictions for terrorism in the United States. At least 40 of these were refugees. Just this year, in addition to the knife attacks by Abdul Artan and Ali Mohamound, four other refugees have committed or attempted to commit acts of terrorism.

Since March 2014 there have been 111 ISIS-related arrests and 60 convictions. There have been nine indictments and six convictions of ISIS supporters in the metropolitan DC area alone. ISIS openly encourages “lone jihadi” attacks, and the State Department now admits ISIS is trying to penetrate the U.S. refugee flow. Some 250 U.S. Muslims from 19 states have either joined or attempted to join ISIS overseas. Many have since returned with little or no oversight.

Let’s be clear: these are not Mennonite terrorists. They are not Episcopalian suicide bombers. Virtually all 580 convictions since 9/11 were Muslim immigrants or American Muslim converts, and the Somali community consistently supplies such malefactors. Yet the Department of Homeland Security has provided tours of airport facilities to groups of Somalis, including explanations of airport inner workings, security protocols, and databases. DHS redacted some of this information as too sensitive to share with the public.

The Refugee Program Is Home to Major Fraud

Virginia knife attacker Ali Mohamound was carrying multiple identities when arrested. The Ohio State terrorist and his family lived in Pakistan for seven years before being resettled to the United States. Why were they not simply resettled in Pakistan? Afghani refugee Ahmad Rahami, the terrorist bomber of New York and New Jersey, originally entered the United States through the asylum program, but then traveled back to Afghanistan, where he apparently became radicalized. How can someone who is supposedly fleeing his home country for his life go back for a visit?

Virtually all U.S. Somalis originally arrived as refugees or asylum seekers or are their children. Many now take months-long trips back to Somalia, contradicting their purported reason for seeking asylum: fleeing Somalia for their lives. Minneapolis actually grants rent relief because Somalis complained about the cost of overdue rent upon their return. The home country visits so many “refugees” make undercut the program’s integrity.

The entire refugee resettlement program has systematic fraud, creating both national security risks and undue fiscal burdens. Refugee advocates claim the vetting process for Syrians is airtight, but U.S. security officials say exactly the opposite. An internal Immigrations, Customs, and Enforcement memo states, “[The] refugee program is particularly vulnerable to fraud due to loose evidentiary requirements where at times the testimony of an applicant alone is sufficient for approval.” The memo goes on to say that “the immigration system is a constant target for exploitation” by terrorists. An Immigration and Naturalization Services assistant commissioner said 95 percent of refugee and asylee applications are fraudulent.

The Obama administration has knowingly and routinely allowed illegal aliens falsely claiming asylum to remain in the United States. A September 2016 DHS Inspector General report found that 1,982 aliens from countries known for immigration fraud or terror-links who were scheduled for deportation were instead granted citizenship using false identities because fingerprint records were missing.

The United Nations selects almost all refugees, and the United States takes more refugees than all other resettlement nations combined. Yet many of the tens of thousands of unvettable Syrians who are accepted don’t meet the refugee definition.

Syrian Christians are facing genocide, and certainly do meet the definition, but represent less than 1 percent of those Syrians resettled so far. Syrian Muslims are more than 98 percent of the total. In the interest of diplomacy we are also resettling populations other countries refuse to take. Most recently, the Obama administration offered to accept 2,465 asylum seekers now being detained by Australia which that country refuses to accept because of their possible ties to terrorism. In response to congressional inquiries, the administration has declared information about this agreement classified.

Heavy Costs for Taxpayers Besides Terrorism Risks

Refugee resettlement is administered by three agencies: the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM), the Health and Human Services Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), and the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). It has grown and metastasized over the years.

In fiscal year 2016, the program cost $2.4 billion, an increase of 205.4 percent since FY 2009. At the last minute Obama boosted ORR’s request to $3.9 billion for FY 2017 to handle the unprecedented flow of minors now being apprehended at the Southwest border. That’s 14,128 in the past two months alone and a 106 percent increase for the year.

Congress provided a pro-rata share of $500 million of this request in the short-term continuing resolution passed on December 9. It cannot be expended until the new Health and Human Services secretary has been installed. He can withhold some or all of those funds, if he chooses.

The table above shows the numbers resettled by category, a total of 195,231 individuals in FY 2015. This represents 20 percent of all immigrants allowed into the United States annually. The numbers will be significantly higher this year if nothing is done.

Since FY 2009, approximately 1 million migrants have arrived through these programs. Program costs average about $10,000 per head in the first year, and refugee welfare use is off the charts, even after five years (see table below). In fact, refugees resettled in the 1980s still receive welfare at rates well in excess of Americans and other immigrants.

The Center for Immigration Studies has estimated the annual cost of resettling Muslim refugees during the first five years at $12,874 per head. Muslim refugees use welfare at higher rates than average. I have estimated a somewhat lower average of $11,574 per head for the entire group. Cumulatively for the years 2009 through 2015, this cohort alone has cost U.S. taxpayers a staggering $48 billion. Since 1980, 3 million have been resettled.

Migrants Create a Heavy Toll on Communities

State and local costs are significant. When the Refugee Act was first passed, the federal government promised to cover 36 months of states’ share of food stamps, Medicaid, Refugee Cash Assistance (RCA), and Refugee Medical Assistance (RMA) for refugees—a huge subsidy. Today it covers no state costs. Refugees rely heavily on local assistance, and school budgets, costs for translation, and other services have exploded. Following is a sampling of problems in many U.S. communities:

Major Conflicts of Interest Among Refugee Resettlers

Nine private contractors, called “Voluntary Agencies” or VOLAGs, resettle refugees with the assistance of 320 “affiliates.” VOLAGs are supposed to consult communities before resettling refugees, but almost never do. They secretly resettle refugees and leave communities to deal with the resulting problems. They regularly withhold information from community leaders and concerned citizens and ignore local complaints.

Refugee resettlement has big effects for small communities throughout the United States, which is a major reason for growing resistance to the program. In one example, a federal agent contacted me in November to describe numerous problems in northern Michigan. He said citizens and public officials from Traverse City and elsewhere expressed concerns over the indiscriminate “dumping” of refugees and illegal aliens in small towns, including the Upper Peninsula, under cover of darkness, without any prior coordination with appropriate public officials (i.e. mayors, town councils, etc.).

Refugees are often employed in the resettlement industry, giving refugees a stake its growth. Many VOLAG leaders who receive federal resettlement grants are former directors of the agencies that administer those grants, and vice versa. Like a revolving door, they cycle in and out of government. For example, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Assistant Secretary Ann Richard is a former vice president for one of the nine VOLAGs. She helped found the International Crisis Group, a leftist organization funded by George Soros.

VOLAGs receive a total of about $1 billion per year from taxpayers and are paid by the head, receiving anywhere from $2,025 to more than $5,000 per refugee. The Government Accountability Office has noted that this creates a strong incentive for VOLAGs to constantly resettle more refugees, regardless of whether it is in the interest of the refugee or the target community.

David M. Robinson, who would later lead PRM, said of the refugee industry: “The solution its members offer to every refugee crisis is simplistic and the same: increase the number of admissions to the United States without regard to budgets or competing foreign policy considerations. On the other hand, it is politically well connected, includes major party donors at the local and national levels, and owns the moral high ground on an extremely emotional issue.”

VOLAGs have not faced any kind of meaningful oversight since the program was established in 1980. None have ever faced a public financial audit despite many calls to do so. The program is biased toward continual growth, and security concerns must be addressed.

Prioritizing Refugees Above American Citizens

The Refugee Act of 1980 dictates benefits that refugees must receive. They go to the front of the line for welfare and public housing, jumping ahead of all Americans, including veterans and the disabled. VOLAGs provide:

Additionally, ORR and other agencies provide numerous special grants available only to refugees. This is supposedly to enable refugees to rapidly become economically self-sufficient. However, ORR’s definition of “economic self-sufficiency” allows refugees to continue to receive every kind of welfare except cash assistance from food stamps or RCA. Refugees thus have a strong incentive to seek U.S. resettlement to obtain benefits.

Maine Gov. Paul LePage told me that elderly autistic residents of Portland, Maine are swelling the rolls of the homeless as their primary caretakers, usually their parents, die, or become unable to care for them, because public housing is taken by refugees.

What Americans and Our Leaders Should Do

The resettlement program is dangerous, expensive, and unfair to Americans. Its structure encourages endless growth, systemic corruption, cronyism, secrecy, and duplicity. The refugee program must be put on hold. Members of Congress have called for a moratorium, and such legislation is circulating. H.R. 3314, the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act, has 86 co-sponsors.

On his first day in office, Trump can pause the entire program by simply resetting the annual refugee targets.

But legislation isn’t needed. On his first day in office, Trump can pause the entire program by simply resetting the annual refugee targets to whatever number has already been reached this fiscal year. The 1980 Refugee Act gives him authority to do this, and subsequent court decisions have declared Congress’s refugee resettlement oversight authority as advisory only.

Trump has stated his desire to halt resettlement from nations of terrorism concern. It would be wiser to pause the entire program.

It costs 12 times as much to resettle refugees as to assist them in place. Almost all refugeeswould prefer to return home than be resettled to a third country. President-Elect Trump’s idea to create “safe zones” in or near countries of conflict is a much more compassionate and cost-effective method of dealing with the refugee crisis. Trump’s State Department should encourage the Gulf States to participate in resettlement, since they currently offer little help.

The VOLAG system needs to be abolished. Asylum and other alternative forms of resettlement should operate case-by-case. Resettlement should be returned to the private act of charity it was before 1980. That structure would be naturally self-limiting, and those financing resettlement would have a much stronger incentive to see that their charitable dollars were not wasted on frauds or potential terrorists. Refugees should be required to become truly economically self-sufficient.

With such restrictions, other nations would have to confront and resolve conflicts they now offload onto America. The U.S. government role should be limited to security: helping create safe zones, identifying other countries that might help more, designating those populations suitable for resettlement, setting numerical limits, and vetting all refugees, asylum seekers, and others seeking U.S. entry. With new leadership, policies and management, Trump’s administration can reinvent the resettlement program to serve America’s interests again.

“Barack Obama is Louis Farrakhan and Karl Marx rolled into one.” Those were the words of businessman Zubi Diamond at a conference I sponsored back in 2011. That clever line might also apply to Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), a candidate for chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC). Obama and Ellison seem to be brothers in both ideology and approach. The combination of Black Muslim ideology and Marxism is something that courses through the veins of Obama and Ellison. So why is Obama opposing the Ellison bid?

The answer is that Obama is smarter than Ellison. Obama has watched his words more carefully, and concealed his ideological predisposition when he ran for president, while Ellison is out of the closet about it. He not only has links to the Black Muslims of Louis Farrakhan, but he defended a member of the Weather Underground spin-off, the Symbionese Liberation Army. Plus, he’s an outspoken critic of the state of Israel.

Obama had some of these same associations when he ran for president. But he had the benefit of a liberal media that were willing to lie and cover up for him. Adding another Obama, in the form of Keith Ellison, is just too much to expect, in terms of continuing this media bias and cover-up. Too much is already known about Ellison.

The other factor is that Obama has recently decided to emphasize the Marxism of his brand, as opposed to his pro-Muslim bias, and is promoting his Secretary of Labor Tom Perez as his choice for DNC chairman.

At his year-end press conference, Obama began talking about the “workers,” the cornerstone of the Marxist economic revolution, saying, “If you look at his body of work on behalf of working people, what he’s [Perez] pushed for in terms of making sure that workers get a fair deal, decent wages, better benefits, that their safety is protected on the job, he has been extraordinary.”

Obama is smart to emphasize the workers. He realizes that the Democrats lost the working class, and if the party has any hope of getting back into power in Congress or the White House, these workers have to be tricked into voting Democrat. The winning strategy, he thinks, is promising Big Government, rather than economic growth and better trade deals, as the solutions to their plight.

Obama must be thinking that Ellison, who wears his Muslim religion and black radicalism on his sleeve, is a loser as far as these workers are concerned. He’s right.

Those who believe that Marxism is dead should take a look at Jacobin magazine, which is openly Marxist and got the seal of approval from The New York Times for its cutting edge approach.

One Jacobin writer, Connor Kilpatrick, has written “On the White Working Class,” an examination of the Democrats’ dilemma. In the Rust Belt, he writes, the white working class voters “finally had enough of the Democrats and defected to Trump.” He writes, “While we hear constantly that they’re demographically dying out, white workers without a college degree remain at least 63 percent of the working class and in twenty years will still be a ‘mere’ 49.5 percent. That’s a ton of potential voters—they were 34% of Obama’s coalition—and yet few liberal pundits seemed to take notice.”

Kilpatrick says that the Democrats abandoned these workers, and that today “it’s an open secret that the party’s program is led by the affluent professional class at best and enlightened Silicon Valley billionaires at worst.”

These are the facts that Obama understands: the white working class doesn’t read The Huffington Post, and it is not attracted to the Black Muslim radicalism of Keith Ellison.

By contrast, with the title of Secretary of Labor, Perez has at least the appearance of favoring the working man and woman. The problem is that he is also an elitist with a racial prejudice against white people. A graduate of Brown and Harvard Universities, he was head of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice before going to the Labor Department. As noted by The Washington Free Beacon, an investigation into the Civil Rights Division by the Department of Justice’s inspector general revealed that Perez “told investigators that white people were not entitled to protection under the Voting Rights Act.” The report of the investigation explains this bias in detail.

If this evidence against Perez gets national attention, it will sink any hope the DNC and the Democrats have in attracting white voters. But will the media bring it up?

The DNC choice is a reminder of the old saying that one path leads to a catastrophe and the other to oblivion. No wonder the Democrats have nothing better to do than play the Russian card against Trump.

John Guandolo, founder of Understanding the Threat, examines the strange background and comments of Obama CIA director John Brennan. He says the agency is heavily infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood. But he is hopeful that the incoming Trump Administration understands the problem and will take corrective action. Watch this blockbuster interview and take action. Go to www.understandingthethreat.com.